The Underappreciated Risks of Severe Space Weather

circletimessquare notes a New Scientist piece calling attention to a recent study by the National Academy of Sciences, which attempts to raise awareness of the dangers of severe solar electromagnetic storms. "In 1859, amateur astronomer Richard Carrington noticed 'two patches of intensely bright and white light' near some sunspots. At the same time, Victorian era magnetometers went off the charts, stunning auroras were being viewed at the equator, and telegraph networks were disrupted — sparks flew from terminals and ignited telegraph paper on fire. It became known as the Carrington event, and the National Academy of Sciences worries about the impact of another such event today and the lack of awareness among officials. It would induce un-designed-for voltages in all high-voltage, long-distance power lines, and destroy transformers, as Quebec learned in 1989. Without electricity, water would stop flowing from the tap, gasoline would stop being pumped, and health care would cease after the emergency generators gave up the ghost after 72 hours. Replacing all of the transformers would take months, if not years. The paradox would be that underdeveloped countries would fare better than developed ones. Our only warning system is a satellite called the Advanced Composition Explorer, in solar orbit between the Sun and the Earth. It is 11 years old and past its planned lifespan. It might give us as much as 15 minutes of warning, and transformers might be able to be disconnected in time. But currently no country has such a contingency plan."

Comments

Re:Another good reason.

[zwei2stein]

I'm not convinced it's worth drastically altering your life away from what you know and enjoy

No, it's: ... from what you know. Fullstop.

You can hardly tell if your life is trully enjoyable if you did not experience different "way of life" indepth, it could as well be that your is quite miserable, but you are only really well ajdusted to it. Btw: Abundance of luxuries does not equal to quality lifetime.

You do not want to go back to trees/rocks/wooden sticks for practical reasons ... i.e. because you do want to live longer than to your 30s. But if you are in for quality of life ...

Average neolithic human is estimated to have worked 5 hours a week. Rest spent doing, well, nothing. Of their 30 years they spent 3% of their life on "necessary" stuff, ended up having "29" years of life.

If you are middle class guy you'd spend 10 hours a work day doing "necessary" stuff life work, commuting, shopping... . 30% of your life. If you live till 60 you spent 20 years on it ... leaving you 40 years to live. Here is the kicker: 20 years of those you spend sleeping, leaving you 20 to "enjoy life" in small chunks.

Guess what? Taken sleep into account, neolithic dude too had 20 years to "enjoy life", nearly nonstop.

(PS: as homework, do some research on how much time per week it took to keep house tidy&neat for housewife in 19 century and 21 century. Guess which ended up having more free time? Sometimes, technology just does not work out to be better)

Its all about prespective and choice ... you either spend your lifetime playing with technology toys, worrying about job security. Or you spend your life time basically just fucking around and worrying about winter. Not really different.

But again, I personally will not go back to trees just yet... But I do understand people who try alternative ways of life. Especially since nowadays they have science and modern medicine to back them up so they will not suffer worst effects of "back2trees".